The July 8, 2009 issue of the Economist talks about building solar thermal projects in the Sahara Desert and transporting the electricity to Europe using high voltage direct current cables. I found this article interesting because it defines the project as a single unit, i.e solar power generation and the associated electric transmission system. We often forget that no one will build an electrical generating plant without knowing if there is a no way to get the power to where it's needed.

A good example of the above is Texas tycoon T. Boone Pickens. He said Wednesday that his ambitious plan to build the world’s largest onshore wind farm in the Texas Panhandle will now be delayed by a year or more. He was unable to get financing to build a $2 billion transmission line intended to connect his planned Pampa Wind Project—a 4,000-megawatt wind farm—to the Texas grid. Pickens did say that the 667 wind turbines he ordered last year from General Electric for delivery in 2011 will likely go toward building a wind farm “someplace else.”

If Sahara Desert scheme were implemented in full, it would involve the following:

• Spending €400 billion ($560 billion) at today’s prices, over the next 40 years,
• Building enough solar power stations to satisfy 15% of European demand in 2050—together with most of North Africa’s and Arabia’s
• Constructing 20 trans-Mediterranean Sea HVDC cables which, unlike conventional AC power lines, can transmit power over long distances and through water without significant losses.

While the technological and financial hurdles are considerable, they are quite managable. Of course this assumes that the need for the power exists and the European Community makes long term commitments to purchasing the power at prices that make the entire project financially feasible. If that occurs that there is a good chance of success. 

What about NIMBY or Not in My Backyard?
Noticably absent from tne Economist's article is the notion of opposition to the project by the environmental community, both local and international. I'll assume that the Saharan countries would find this project attractive since it would bring in foreign investment and diversity their revenues. However, local people's lives will be affected and the consortium will have to mitigate those impacts and other enviromental effects.

Although mitigation will reduce enviromental impacts, they will not eliminate them entirely. There is an environmental tradeoff even with solar energy projects. People will have to get used to the idea that certain regions are blessed with energy resources (solar, wind, geothermal) and that areas that need the power are far away. To do otherwise, is to not go forward and continue to rely on fossil fuel fired power generation.

Can this model be repeated in the U.S.? Probably not at this scale and even if it could it would take years to go through the State and Federal government's regulatory process and even more in the Courts. See our article on renewable energy- read the small print.

Security, including cybersecurity, are also relevant issues too since the threats of terrorism in the Saharan countries are real. Europe and the power consortium called Desertec will have to enable a very robust security plan to ensure the reliability of the project. See the details at http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13982870